The Sun. — London, England, 1838-01-24 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF L ORDS, JA ,v. 23. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at ten minutes past Me. THE DUCHESS OF KENT'S ANNUITY BILL Was read a third time and passed. BISHOPRICS OF SODOR AND MANN. The Earl of RIPON laid on the table a Bill for continuing the Bish oprics of Sodor and Mann. The Bill related to a subject which the Noble Lord had brought before the House on a former day, and he would state more fully his views upon it when he came to move the second reading of the Bill. WEST INDIAN SLAVERY. Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition agreed to at a meeting of upwards of 5,000 persons at the Town Hall of Birmingham on the 28th of December last. The petition was only signed by the High Bailiff Mr. Scholefield, M.P., and therefore Gould only be received as his petition although it had met with the universal approbation of the meeting. The petitioners complained of the conduct of the persons who had received the 18 millions and a half of money for emancipating their slaves, and payed their Lordships to take means to compel them to complete their arrangements. The Noble and Learned Lord entirely agreed in the terms and prayer of the petition. He would also take this opportu nity of correcting a mistake which seemed to have been fallen into in reference to what he had stated on a former occasion upon this subject. What the Noble and Learned Lord bad stated was, that it was an exag geration to say the Act of 1833, instead of bettering bad worsened the condition of the West Indian slaves ; and he gave as an instance in sup port of that, that there was a very considerable increase at this moment of the supplies sent to the West Indies by the mother country, both in regard to the amount and the quality of such supplies, and which proved that the Negro comforts had increased.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord also presented a similar petition from the inhabitants of Great and Little Broughton. The Noble Lord also presented a petition frcm Mr. R. Cotterell, a merchant of the City of London, complaining of the defects of the Law of Debtor and Creditor. CANADA. Lord ELLENBOROUGH moved for certain Returns with respect to Canada of which he gave notice last night.—Ordered. Lord DENMAN presented a petition from Nottingham against the peseta system of Negro apprenticeship. Lord GLENELO, in answer to a question from Lord Brongham, stated that the returns relative to Antigua were in the course of print ing, and would be laid on the table in a few days. Die House then adjourned to Thursday. HOUSE OP COMMONS, JAN. 23. The SPEA um took the Chair at Four o'Clock. Mr. DUGDALE brought in the Birmingham Small Debts Bill, which was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time to mot row. New. HUTTON presented a petition from the President and Members of the Chamber of Commerce of Dublin against the Fishg,uard Haibour Bill. Mr. CHALMERS presented a petition from Montrose, praying that t',e House would not suspend the Constitution of Canada. S_r W. SOMERVILLE presented a petition to the same effect from Drogheda. Mr. KISNAIRD presented two petitions from Perth in favour of the Bal'ot Mr. GORDON presented a petition from several Magistrates and olders of the county of Aberdeen, praying I'or an alteration in the .staadlng Orders of the House relative to private Bills and the taking evidence thereon. The subject appeared to him (Mr. Gordon) of the highest importance, and if there was no Committee to which the peti tion could be referrcd, he begged to give notice that at an early oppor. tunity he would draw the attention of the House to it. 'ilie petition was ordered t• lie on the table. An Hos. ME.MSER presented a petition from Dudley in favour of the lallot. REFUGE FOR THE DESTITUTE. Y; C, LUSHINGTON, in consequence of the importance of the adjourned debate fixed for this evening, postponed to Thursday the nt , .tion of which he had given notice, for leave to bring in a Bill to incorporate the Subscribers to the " Refuge for the Destitute," and to enable thew the better to carry on their benevolent designs. CONACRE TENANTS. Mr. LUCAS rose to move for leave to bring in a hilt relative to con acre telants in Ireland. The object of the Bill was to regulate a species cf tenathy which was very common in Ireland, but which was wholly unisnown in England, and he be:L.ved also in Scotland. The Existing law gave rise to very great confusion end inconvenience, and the object of this Bill was to 'anction and make hoe that ,chich was the general practice arnorgst the farmers in Ireland, arssi to prevent the contrary practice being followed. He was ready now o enter into the details of the measure if the House wished him to do so, bit he thought the most convenient course would beto bring in the Bill, let it beprinted, and the discussion taken at a subsequent period to suit the convenience of the House. Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR seconded the motion. Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. THE COMMERCIAL DAILY LIST. Mr. HUM E presented I% patition from vve.ral hundred Merchants of the city ,n a subject of which he Lad a givon notico, relative to the produc tion cf a copy of the memoral addressed to the Lords of the Treasury, by the Merchants of London, as to certain proceedi,,gs threatened by the 3'.a:np-offlce against the Commercial Daily List. From some conversa tion which had taken place between hi,nseif and the Chancellor of the }.chequer, he believed some mistake existed as to the intentions of the treasury, and he therefere would withdraw his motion. 'The CH AN'CELI.OIt of the EXCEIEQUE:I said he should have no difficulty in meeting the case, and ii necossary, of placing the papers on she table of the Hou: c. PRIVATE. DIMS. Mr. P. THOMSON rose to bring en the motion of which he had given notice, founded on the resolutions of the Committee on pubiiC and Private Bills. The object he had in view iv,:s to obtain a which should be laid on the table and printed, and a certain time ; Mowed between the printing and the sezond reading of the Bill. she first resoiution was" That no private Bill beread asecond time until six days a'tcr a breviate thereof shall have been laid on the table of the blouse, and have been printed." He would then propose a resolution stating g enerally what that breviate should contain, and then propose that the Speal;er should be authorised to give directions for the prepara tion of this breviate, and such regulations as might be necessary to carry the object of the House into effect, if it agreed to the resolution. The Committee had come to these resolutions in consequence of the incon venience arising from private Bills having been in a manner smuggled through the House on the second reading—(Hear, hear)— without the the House being generally informed of the contents of the Eills. It was :ate that the House had an opportunity of disapproving of the Bill on Ili being reported. But it was said if the principle was objected to why not stop the Bill on the second reading, so that it would inflict great hardship on parties atter they had been at all the expense of going through the Committee, if the Bill should be rejected, or the parties compelled to desist from prosecuting it. '1 here was besides that, a particular class of Bills of very great impor tance, which Hon. Members who were acquainted with the practice of the House were aware did not excite great opposition from private interests in the Committee; and the consequence was that the oppor tunity to which he had alluded did not occur in their case, and the Bill was smuggled through, or not to use a harsh term, It passed without any attention through a second reading, and the report of the Committee was also agreed to without exciting any attention, and thereby great pub lic Injustice was done. He (Mr. P. Thomson) had had occasion, with reference to more than one Bill, to point out the extreme in convenience that had resulted from such a state of things, and he could not quote a stronger case than the Fishguard Bill, which had been introduced during thelast Session. There was no Hon. Member ac quainted with the circumstances of that Bill who would not agree with him that some remedy was required. It had been suggested by many gen tlemen, who had taken an interest in the subject, that they ought So do something more than he (Mr. P. Thomson) now proposed— namely. that they ought to have a breviate afterwards, and before the passing of the Bill, in order :to let the House know what changes might have been introduced in the Bill. But he (Mr. P. Thomson) did not think it necessary to go so far in the present stage of the proceed ings. The third resolution provided that the Speaker should make such regulations as that the breviate should not be a mere abstract ef the marginal notes of the Bill, but that it should really con tain what alterations were proposed to be altered by it. livery Hon. Member in the House was obliged to the Speaker for the vast trouble which he had taken, in order to simplify the private business of the House—it had taken much trouble from the shoulders of every one who had private business to attend to. He could not an ticipate any opposition to his motion—he would therefore content him 'elf with moving the resolutions. DUCHESS OF KENT'S ANNUITY BILL. Justices Coleridge and Coltman brought from the House of Lords the Duchessof Kent's Annuity Bill, which had been agreed to with an ;amendment. PRIVATE BILLS. Mr. HUME was of opinion that the House would, by agreeing to the Resolutions. merely extend the machinery which already clogged the private business of the House, without in any way doing any good. He had three years ago proposed a plan which would in his opinion do much snore good, and he thought the House would do better by then adopting it, viz., to refer all private Bills to a limited number of persons, who would thereby be made responsible to the House. He wished to know whether the Speaker was to examine all Bills, in order to see whether the breviate was a faithful one or not ?—(Hear.) He therefore threw out the suggestion to the Government, that Com mittees should be limited to a small number of Members, who should be held responsible for the Bills which they forwarded to the House. He had no doubt that this would render Bills more accurate and credit able to the House, and would put an end to the present system of canvas and solicitation, by which parties interested in Bills endeavoured to pre vail on Members to attend to vote through the influence of their Con ,stituents. Mr. AGLIONBY begged leave to call the attention of the House to the evidence which had been given some time ago before a Committee Of which he was Chairman, not merely on Public and Private Bills, but as to the wording of Acts of Parliament. He understood at that time the Noble Lord, the Secretary for the Home Department, to say that although he did not wish to originate a measure of such great difficulty, he would give the matter his best consideration, if any Member should found upon the evidence a motion for the appointment of an Officer to draw up all Acts of Parliament. As the matter was conducted at pre sent, Bills were drawn by different persons and were liable to different constructions, so that the House often passed Acts, of which it did not know the meaning. He only wished to bring the attention of Ike House to this subject, but did not oppose the resolutions. Sir It. PEEL said, lie should not make any objection to the bre elate. He supposed of course that a particular officer of experience a.ad ability would be selected for the purpose of preparing the breviate, and that it would not be left to the parties themselves. (Hear, hear, hear.) He was fearful, however, !hat the effect of having this breviate would be to relax the attention of Hon. Members to the language of the Bills, and he begged it to be un derstood that the greatest mischief was generally produced by the in sertion of particular phrases in the Bills ; the effect of which phrases was not clearly understood till the Bills had passel.—(Hear, hear.) Lord G. SOMERSET would not object to the breviate, but he suggested that, as the mischievous interpolations which so often crept into Private Bills were generally introduced in Committee, the breviate atsould he made, not on the second reading of the Bill, but on the re. pot.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. S. LEFEVRE said that unless the resolutions were prepared by a person of great experience, they would tend to great inconvenience ..nd confusion, but he was sure they would be perfectly safe in leaving stem in the Speaker's hands. After a few words from Mr. P. THOMPSON 'and Mr. HU3IE the question was put and carried. Tile SPEAKER then said, that as the House had imposed on him this duty he would endeavour to discharge it to the best of his ability, ♦nd in case any difficulty should arise he would at once mention the matter, in order that if any change in the general laws relating to the The business of the House were to result from it, he should have the advice of those who were qualified by experience to assist him. Sir ROBERT FERGUSON moved for a return of the money ad vanced for the uniform valuation of lands and tenements in Ireland, under the Act 7 Geo. IV., chap. 62, and subicquent Acts. Also a -copy of the estimate of the sum like;y to be required for the same pur p..se for the quarter ending :list March, 1838.—Agreed to. CANADA—ADJOURNED DEBATE. The Order of the Day for resuming the adjourned debate on the Canada Government Bill having been read, Sir W. MOLESWORTH said—Though I shall feel it my duty to wrote against the further progress of the Bill, which is now under the con- A ideration of the House, because it would suspend the Constitution of a a _ v e people, yet I offer no objection to what I understand to be the most i n -,:),,rtant feature of the Ministerial measure, namely, that there shall Le !ear lc/Canada a person in whom confidence can be placed; whose duty it will be to administer the affairs of the Province, and to reduce the people to contented allegiance. It is both a dangerous and delicate thing to express a decided opinion u to the fitness of any individual for so difficult a task as that of Governor of this insurgent Province. Ido not, how. ever, hesitate to state my humble, though decided, approbation of the choice of her Majesty's Ministers.—(Hear, hear.) If tnere be a Noble- man in this country, who, for energy, decision of character, manly and liberal sentiments, is better fitted than another for so desirous a task, that Nobleman is, I believe, the Earl of Durham. Reluctant as I am to pin my faith upon any individual, still I feel confident that Lord Durham, if left to the unfettered exercise of his judgment, will accomplish the object of his mission.—(Hear, hear.) Understanding, as I do, that the purposes for which he is deputed to Canada are to restore peace and tranquillity, to recall the revolted subjects of the empire to their alle- giance, to enforce in every quarter the majesty of the laws, to sustain the honour and dignity of this country, best sustained (I will assert) by acts ofgrace and mercy; and, lastly, to devise, along with the delegates of the people what form of free Constitution will be best suited to the pro vince, and in what respect the existing institutions of the country ought to be changed.—(Hear, hear.) These undoubtedly are most onerous duties, requiring for their performance the soundest judg ment and discretion ; every requisite power should in justice be given to the Governor who takes upon himself so weighty a responsibility. At the same time, for the exercise of his delegated authority, the Governor should be most strictly responsible ; he alone should . _ be answerable for every act that is done or emitted ; all responsibility should be concentrated upon his single head ; and he should be made to feel, that though he alone will merit all the praise of success, he must equally bear all the odium, blame, and deep discredit of failure; that if successful he will render the most valuable and en. during services to his country, and acquire the greatest political re. sown; but that failure will make the state of affairs in Lower Canada still more complicated, and still more disastrous, and failure will be accompanied by the utter destruction of the political character of the Nobleman from whom so much is expected, and to whom so much is entrusted—in short, to him it should and will be a question of political life or death. Grant t• him, therefore, every requisite power, make him strictly responsible; but, above all things, leave him unfettered by any specific instructions from the Colonial Office; for every impartial person, after a careful perusal of the despatches which have lately been laid upon the table of the House, must, I think, be convinced of the ignorance and incapacity of that Offiee.—(Hear, hear.) The necessity of sending Lord Durham on so extraordi nary a mission proves of itself, that the Head of the Colonial Office has been, and is unable to carry on the Administration of the affairs of Ca. nada in the ordinary manner—that he has permitted events to occur which render it imperative to place in other hands an extraordinary con trol over the Province.—(Hear, hear.) Her Majesty's Ministers have selected the person whom they deem fittest for the office of Governor- General; it would therefore be most absurd to shackle him in any way by the orders of persons who are ♦irtually acknowledged to be either less capable than himself, or to be of proved incapacity. In proportion as Lord Durham is independant of the control of the Colonial Office, or even of her Majesty's Government, in exactly the same ratio will the probability of a successful termination of these affairs increase.— (Cheers.) This country in its conduct towards Canada ought now to acknowledge that there are long standing grievances, which ought and must be redressed; that its rulers have been to blame for having so long neglected those wrongs; that it is most sincerely anxious to make every reparation in its power for the negligence of the authorities; that in earnest of its sincerity it has taken the administration of th'e affairs of the provlace out of the hands of the ordinary authorities, and entrusted Lord Durham with plenary power to accom plish the benevolent intentions of the mother country. The first act of the Noble Lord should be one of grace and mercy, an oblivion of all past political offinces, a pardon to all political offenders, a genetal am. nesty.—(Cheers.) I hailed with joy the mention made by the Noble Lard of an amnesty, and cannot but observe that the only person who ob . .. jested to that wise and humane proposal—the only person who thirsted alter slaughter, and called aloud for blood, was the representative of the small modicum of learning and Christian charity which exist in the University of Oxford.—(Hear, hear.) The only means by which the revolted subjects of her Majesty can be reduced to a state of contented allegiance, are a redress of the grievances of which the House of As sembly have so long, so justly, and so consistently complained, and such an alteration in the Constitution of the province as will prevent the recurrence of similar abuses ; in short, a general compliance with the demands, on which the House of Assembly have so long insisted with such praiseworthy determination. The Noble Lord the Member for Stroud (Lord John Russell) the other night arraigned the conduct of the House of Assembly; last night that body was most ably defended by their agent, my friend, Mr. roebuck - . He contenleti that in the disputes be.ween the colony and the mother country not the House of Assembly but tae Colonial Ministers of the Crown were the ' persons to blame. Thos we have heard both sides, the arrzigner and the arraigned, the accuser and the defender, and it is for this tribunal to decide who has been iu the wrong. 'That a once most loyal colony should have suddenly burst forth into rebellion is a matter for grave and serious inquiry, it proves that blame attaches somewhere—(Cheers) the people of this country have a right to know who have been chiefly culpable, and who ought to be held up to public indignation. The Noble Lard, the Member for South Lancashire (Lord Stanley), said that he would not inquire into past events, or who were the originators or the present disasters. This was judicious policy on hi, part He was wise, for the sake of his party, to attempt to evade this question.— (Cneers.) From a careful and anxious perusal of all the documents ; from a strict examination of the Psi liamontary folios in which that evn deuce is contained, I have come to the conclusion that the Tories have been to a great extent the cause of the present disasters— (Hear, hear, hear)—that it was their mischievcus policy, con. tinued through a long series of years, which first generated, then aggravated, the grievances of the Canadians, and produced those feel. injs of discontent and distrust, which rendered conciliation nearly im practicable, and led ultimately to revolt. These considerations have been completely lost sight of in the late debates. The Right Hon. Ba ronet opposite has assumed, as an all but acanowletiged fact, that the Colonial Government of the Tories was nearly perfect, and that a return of his party to power would be the greatest benefit to the Colonies. I admired the dexterity with which he made these assumptions, to which some of my Hon. Friends, I was sur prised to find, lent the weight of their authorey by greatly magnifying the liberality of the intentions of Sir George Murray and Lord Aber. deer.—(Hoar, hear.) As tar as Sir George Murray was concerned, am inclined to suspect that those liberal sentiments were only written with the view of being laid upon the table of the House, and printed— (Laughter)—as with ample opportunity they never gave birth to any lit a alactions, and lam induced to believe that on the much wished f r by Hon. Gentlemen opposite advent of their party to power, the colonial policy of this empire would not be in any way improved, not to say not deteriorated —(Hear, hear, and laughter) At least, au I infer from the result of their policy towards Canada. A more loyal people did not exist, nor one more firmly attached to the dominion of this empire than the inhabitants of that province; for a long time they did not even sufficiently prize the benefit of free institutions; they looked with indifference Olson the possession of electoral rights, and of a representative Assembly; their boast was that under the sceptre of England they enjoyed without trouble all the advantages of the Government of the United States.— (Hear, hear.) They were soon aroused from their political apathy by acts of Tory mis rule, and taught to value privileges which they had previously but little cherished. This change of feeling took place under the Government of Sir James Craig, about the year 1807, when Lord Castlereagh was Secretary of State for the Colonies. Sir James Craig acted in the most violent manner towards the people of the province; addressed the House of Assembly in the most disrespectful terms ; rejected their proposal to defray the civil expenses of the province; twice dissolved the House of Assembly in a year ; and in order to influence the elections, caused the press of a Liberal paper to be seized ; three of the leading members of the former Assembly to be thrown into gaol on charges of sedition, which were never attempted to be sustained. This insane conduct of the Tory Governor destroyed the influence both of the Administration and of all persons connected with it ; since that period tire Government has never been able again to command a majority in the House of As sembly. These events were soon followed by the American war, du ring the continuance of which the inhabitants of Lower Canada lavished their blood and their treasure in defence of the province, and showed a zeal and a courage in the cause of this country which has been but ill requited. From the conclusion of the war in 1314 down to 1818 little occurred worthy of notice. The dissensions occasioned by Sir James Craig's misgovernment were renewed, and an attempt was made to impeach some of the Judges for the advice given to the Governor. In the latter year the House of Assembly obtained permission to defray the civil expenditure of the Province. In the subsequent year the dis putes about the Supply Bill commenced. When in 1810 the House of Assembly first offered to defray the civil expenditure, that expenditure did not exceed 40,0001. per annum. In 1817 it had reached 60,0001. ; and in 1819 the Assembly was called upon for an additional 16,0001. The House of Assembly became alarmed ; they found that in proportion as the custom revenues of the Province had increased, the civil expenditure likewise increased—a fact easy to be accounted for when it is remem_ bered that neither those revenues nor the civil expenditure of the Pro vince had been under the control of the representatives of the people. The House of Assembly in consequence narrowly scrutinised the expen diture, struck off several useless expenses, and passed a Supply Bill by items, which was rejected by the Legislative Council. With this Act of the Legislative Council commenced the financial disputes of the province, those financial disputes which have never entirely terminated. Front the year 1820 to the year 1828 was the disastrous, and I will even term it disgraceful Government of Lord Dalhousie; of that period Lord Bathurst was the Colonial Secretary during seven years. Mr. Huskisson was Colonial Secretary only for a very short time. During that period it stay be seen what in reality is the conduct of a Tory Go. vernment in the Colonies when not under the immediate influence of the force of public opinion; and what acts of injustice they will then perpetrate. For instance, in 1822, a Bill was sud. denly introduced for the purpose of uniting the two provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, without any information whatsoever being given to the people of the two provinces. This act of gross injustice was fortunately delayed by the etferts of my Honourable Friend, the Member for Kilkenny and Sir James Mackintosh, until in formation of the intentions of the Government was conveyed to the provinces. Public Meetings were then held for the first time in every part of Lower Canada, and the strongest indignation and opposition to the measure was expressed by the inhabitants of both pro vinces, more especially by those of Lower Canada, and in con sequence of the universal feeling on this subject the Bill was never again introduced. In the same year the Canada Trade Bill was passed, which rendered permanent certain temporary taxes, which had been granted by the House of Assembly in order to defray the expenses of the American war : this was most unconstitutional, and in direct violation of the Act of 1721. The same Act, and the Canada Tenures Act of 1825 (to which I shall have again to allude) interfered with the whole tenure of private property in the province, and altered to a great extent the law of real property. At the close of 1823 the Receiver_ general failed for 96,000/. of the public money, about a year and a half of the civil expenditure of the province. It appears, says the ComMit tee of 1828, that no acquittal could be traced from the Treasury of a later date than the year 1814. It appears, likewise, that the fact of the Receiver -general's insolvency, was known to the Governor a considera ble time before he was suspended, and the Governor even lent him 30,0001., out of the army chest. Such is the manner in which Hon. Gentlemen opposite administered the pecuniary affairs of the Province. No securities had been taken in the province for the Receiver-General. About the same sime, two Sheriffs failed, in whosehanda were the monies of poor suitors ; one failed for 37,0001., and another for a less sum. It appeared, likewise, no securities had been taken for them. During the whole period from 18‘.. , 0 to 18'28 only two supply Bills were passed by the Legislative Council, an account of the disputes between the House of Assembly and the Colonial-office, with regard to the Civil List, and with regard to the claim of the House of Assembly to appropriate the revenues raised under an Act of 1774. The Legislative Council proved themselves by their conduct with regard to the Supply Bills to be (to use the words applied to them by the Member for North Lancashire) the mere tools of the local Government; at one time, at the wish of one Government, they accepted the same description of Supply Bill which they rejected at another time at the bidding of the Colonial-office. But the Government, undoubtedly with the sanction of the Colonial office, did not hesitate to seize without authority the monies in the public chest. The Committee of 1828 says, " that the Local Government has thought it necessary through a long series of years to have recourse to a measure (which nothing but the most extreme neces sity could justify), of annually appropriating by its own authority large sums of the money of the province, amounting to no less than 140,0001., without the consent of the representatives of the people, under whose control the appropriation o f th es e sums i s pl ace d by the Con s titution tour Committee cannot but express their deep regret that such a state of things should have been allowed to exist for so many years in a British colony without any communication or reference having been l o n f a d other h e e grave vPea dismissalr allegationsii Parliament n n t , on n y againstmthileit militia b ot j ihn e te. administration fo'rrht the e Committeeco constitutional of Icio. nr d l a i lkee exercise Dalhousie , t , e; f their rights ; of the sudden and extensive remodelling of the Commis. don of the Peace, to serve, as it is alleged, political purposes ; of a vex atious system of prosecutions f or lib e l at t h e i nstance of the Attorney. General, and of the harsh and unconstitutional spirit in which thes THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JANUAIIY 24, 1838. prosecutions have been conducted. Such, according to a Committee of the House of Commons appointed on the motion of Mr. Huskisson, was the mode in which the Tories governed a country for no less a period than eight years. The petition complaining of these grievances, signed by no less than 87,000 persons, was presented to the House of Com mons. In consequenee of the report of that Committee, Lord Dal. housie was recalled from Canada, and his illegal, and I will almost say iniquitous conduct, was recompensed by a high military com mand in India. In the same year, Sir George Murray came into power, and wrote that despatch which my lion. Friends have so praised for liberality of sentiment, without taking the trouble of examining whether it gave birth to any liberal acts. He did nothing. Few Colonial Ministers were ever placed in a more favourable position. He might have rendered the greatest service to his country, and averted the difficulties under which this country is now labouring with regard to Canada. In short he might have merited all the praise my Hon. Friends has bestowed upon him. The House of Assembly had expressed ahnost extravagant ad miration of the Report of the Committee of 18 0 8—all that was then re quired was to follow out the intentions of the Committee by passing an Act of the Imperial Parliament to relieve the Lords of the Treasury from the duty of appropriating the revenues raised under the Act of 1774, no one can doubt that all those unhappy dissensions about a permanent Civil List, and about the independence of the Judges, would have been easily settled. 1628, 1829, 1830 passed away ; nothing was done by Sir George Murray. The excuse was that debates in Parliamaelt on the Catholic Emancipation, the death of the King, and other events prevented him from introducing the measures required. This ' excuse, if well-founded, is the best practical illustration of the difficulty, if not impossibility, of governing, with anything like the semblance of justice, a colony removed three thousand miles from the seat of govern. ment. But the excuse is an absurd one ; for Honourable Gentle men are aware how easily Colonial Bills are hurried through this House, aid the Act required would have consisted only of a few lines, and a single clause. Indeed, a similar Act was passed in 1831, during the disputes on the Reform Bill, To the non-passing of the Act in question, I attribute the present disasters. And for those evils I contend, therefore, that Sir G. Murray, and his friends opposite, are to a great degree responsible. The House of Assembly on the one hand, the Colonial-office on the other, maintain each its right to eontrol the revenues raised under the Act of 1774. Supply Bills were passed by the House of Assembly, in which die claims of the Assembly were indirectly maintained—they were protested against, but ac cepted by Sir James Kempt who acted, I acknowledge, in the most liberal and conciliatory maner, though it appears from the dispatches of Kr George Murray that his conduct hardly met with the approbation of the Colonial-office. The Hon. Baronet the Member fur Devonport said that all the financial claims of the House of Asserably have been granted—so they are—that proves they were just claims; but when was justice done? The claims were made in 1794, a portion of them were conceded in 1831, and the rest in 1838 —forty-two years delay of justice! If, however, tardy justice had been done in 18e8, that would suffice; but nothing was done. In conse quence of the delay to which I have referred angry disputes continued, producing great and unnecessary irritation ; the expectations of the people of the province had been greatly excited by the Report of the Committee of 1828 ; those expectations were disap. pointed ; deep seated distrust had succeeded to confidence, and when Lord Grey's Administration came into power,* they had to contend with the evil effects of more than twenty years of' Tory misgovernment and tyranny. Their task was a most difficult one, and I will not even take it upon myself to assert, that with the then state of feeling' of the inhabitants of Lower Canada, it would have been possible finally to settle the existing difficulties, without pursuing a course of policy, which none but men of superior and energetic minds would have dared to attempt, and which, perhaps, at first would have found but few supporters. With the removal of Sir G. Murray from the Colonial Office, the reign of Tory policy in that department of the state did not however terminate, and I have no doubt that Hon. Gen. Hemet' opposite will gladly acknowledge that Lord Ripon (who then became Colonial Secrete! y) belongs to their party. Lord Aylmer was made Governor of Lower Canada about the same time Lord Ripon, by the Act of the Ist and ed Wiiliam IV , surrendered at last to the House of Assembly the revenues raised under the Act of 1774. Ile, however, most unfortunately, determined to retain the casual and territorial revenues, which had hitherto been placed at the disposal of the Colonial Legislature for general purposes. He re tained them, it must be observed, in order for the support of the Este. blished Church of England. A most unfounded charge has been brought against the House of Assembly with regard to these revenues, namely that they laid claim to the appropriation of sums of money to which they had no right whatsoever. This charge was re fitted last night by Mr. Roebuck. In reading the message of Lord Dorchester, in 1794, and •f Sir James Kempt, in 1828, both of which prove that those revenues s ire generally placed at the disposal of the Colonial Legislature—indeed in 1799 the House cf Assembly made a permanent grant of 5,5531. 11s. Id. in return for those revenues. The Hon. Baronet the Member for Devonport denied that the message of Lord Dorchester did not place those funds at the dis posal of the colony. I contend it did; that the claim of Lord Ripon to apply them to the support of the Church of England was a most unjusti fiable one. I will, ism proof of this position, refer to the evidence of Lord Aylmer, who in a despatch dated 126th January, 1832, told Lord Ripon with regard to these revenues, " Here then the Crown and the House of Assembly are still at issue ; and I cannot conceal from your Lordship my apprehensions that the latter will never be induced to forago its pretensions, which certainly derive considerable weight, from the circumstance of these revenues having hitherto been placed at the disposal of the Colonial Legislature for general purposes." Lord Ripon thought proper, however, to divert these revenues horn the purposes to which they bad heretofore been applieil, in order Is give 3001. a-year to the Bishcp of Quebec, aid to maintain the Established Churce of England, to which communion about one. tinh of the Protes tants, that is about one-twenty-titth of the whole population, belonged. Aries this act Hon. Gentlemen opposite cannot for one moment hesitate to acknowledge that Lord Ripon was truly their own Colonial Secretary.—( Hear, hear, hear.) In consequence of the disputes about the casual and territorial revenues, the House of Assembly refused to grant a permanent Civil List. In consequence of the conduct of the House of Assembly, the Nobls Lord the Member for North Lancashire brought an accusation against the House of As sembly of a breach of faith. He first made that charge in 1834, he has repeated it almost every year, when he was obliged by my Hon. Friend Sir. Roebuck to acknowledge that it w4s utterly unfounded; but so valid was the authority supposed to be upon which that charge res'ed, being no lees than that of a person who had once been Colonial Secretary, that it obtained the widest Cheulations, is still generally credited ; and I find from the newspapers that it was repeated a short time agoby the " Fidus Achates" of the Noble Lord opposite in a speech at Carlisle, wherein he proved to demonstration that he had al ways been a Tory, and the same charge I see, is repeated in the leading article of the " Morning Chronicle" of to-day. Great is the guilt of him who makes unfounded assertions ; and the Noble Lord has much to answer for in this respect. I will not enter into an examination of the documents in order to disprove the accusation against the House of As sembly ; the documents are to be found in the evidence laid before the Committee of 1834.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The charge was that the House of Assembly had promised to grant a permanent Civil List on the passing of the first an d second William IV. Now I will merely observe that in a despatch dated 15th of March, 1831, Lord Aylmer informed Lord Itipon that the House of Assembly would not grant a permanent Civil List unless the casual and territorial revenues were surrendered. This despatch was acknowledged by Lord. ; Ripsn on the 15th May, 1831 , and it was not till September of t he same' year that the lit and 2d a William IV. was passed; conse quently, Lord Ripon was well aware that the House of Assembly would not assent to his proposal of a permanent Civil List, four months at least before this Act was passed. Connected with these disputes about the territorial revenue and the permanent Civil List, is the question of the independence of the Judges. The Noble Lord the Member for Stroud, whilst arrsinging the other night the conduct of the House of Assembly, complained of their refusing to grant perma nent salaries to the Judges. It will hardly be believed after all which has been said on this subject, that the House of Assembly did pass an Act granting the permament salaries requited; that the Act was thankfully accepted by Lord Aylmer ; and that Lord Aylmer most earnestly requested Lord Ripon to accept it, and if Lord Ripon had accepted it, the disputes would have terminated, but Lord Ripon refused the Bill for some inconceivable reason. I will produce the proof of these assertions. Lord Aylmer, in his Address of the sth De cember, 1831, called the attention of the House of Assembly c hiefly to the independence of the Judges, he says, in conclusion, after r eferring . to other subjects, " But he is most anxious to see the question of the m_ dependence of the Judges, and of permanent provision for th eir salaries, retired allowances, and incidental expenses, finally disposed o f by a dis tinct and substantive enactment, before bringing the other, and coin ea: . ratively less important measure, specifically under their consideration." The House will find in the evidence of the Committee of 1834 the Bill passed by the House of Assembly, in compliance with the request of Lord A ylmer.:An objection has been urged against that Bill, that the amount of salary of the judges was not stated, and that they were to be voted an nually ; but the words of the Bill are " that from and after the passing of this Act, the salaries which are now annually allowed and paid to the said judges, shall be secured to them in a fixed and permanent man ner ;" and Lord Aylmer fully explains the reason for not mentioningthe amount of the judges' salaries in the Bit ; he tells Lord R i p on in a despatch, dated the 26th of January, 1e32, " I think it nec essary to mention to your lordship, that in framing my message to the House of As sembly upon the independence ef thejudges, I conceived it unnece ssar y to make any specific t tetement regarding their salaries and retired allo wances, for it was well understood before hand that the Assembly was full y prepared to continue the salaries of the Judges upon their present foot. ing, and to make a liberal provision for their retired allowances. The event has justified this expectation." This Bill received the unanimous assent of the Legislative Council ; and the following were the terms its which Lord Aylmer spoke of this measure in his address to the House of Assembly and to the Legislative Council:—" Amongst the many important measures adopted this Session, all of which are more or less calculated to promote the interests of the province, I have (he said) great satisfaction in noticing the Bill for establishing the indepen dence of the Judges. 1 think it necessary at the same time to in form you, that although the principle of this Bill coincides altoge ther with the views of his Majesty's Government, it contains one or two provisions which impose upon me th e necessity of reserving it for the signification of his Majesty's pleasure, The passing of the Bill for securing the independence of the Judges, may be considered as the first practical effect of the despatch of Viscount Goderich of the 7th of July." Such were the terms in which Lord Aylmer spoke of this Bill to the House of Assembly, at the same time he wrote to Lord Ripon, en treating him to agree to the measure. Ile says In his despatch of the 2.5 th of January, 1832 :—" I take leave with the utmost submission to recommend it to the favourable consideration of his Majesty. Once rejected, it is highly probable that no other from the House of Assembly at a future period can he expected upon more favourable terms, or even upon terms equally favourable." Sueh was the language of Lord Aylmer to Lord Ripon, nevertheless, Lord Ripon rejected the Bill. Who was tobla - ne ? The Colonial Minister. There are no other events of any note which occurred during the re tnainder of Lord Ripon's Colonial Administration, except that in 1332 tin account of the Supp l y Bill bein g reserved for the consideration of the Home Authorities, Lord Aylmer thought proper to take, without suffi cient authority, a certain portion of the public monies. For this act, however, it must in justice to Lord Ripon be stated that Lord Aylmer was severely censured. I n the y ear 1833 Lord Ripon was suc ceeded by another Noble Lord, whom I doubt not the Tories will mnst readily claim as their own, and be willing to bear the responsibility for his acts. That Noble Lord, in his previous office, had not won the affections of the Irish people, nor, on account of his Colonial Administration, did the inhabitants of Lower Canada bear towards him kindlier feelings. The situation of the Noble Lord was well delineated by the caricaturists of the day, as that of a person who was leaping out of the frying-pan into the fire. In consequence of the conduct of the Legislative Council in rejecting the Supply Bill passed by the Assembly, the House of Assembly became convinced of the impos sibility of carrying on the Government in harmony with the other branch of the Legislature ; they sent a humble address to his Majesty, p ra ying him to sanction a General Asse mbl y of the people, for the pur pose of determining what alteration should be made in the Constitution of the Province; the reply of the Noble Lord in a despatch which was laid before the House of Assembly, was in a tone better fitted to the angry disputes and contentions of this House, than for the reply of a Colonial Minister to lb eprovincial Parliament.—(Hear, hear.) Arid the Noble Lord offended the House of Assembly by saying with regard to the proposed plan, that "on the mode pr o p ose d his Majesty is willing to p ut no harsher construction than that of ex treme inconsiderateness ; to the object sought to be obtained, hi s Ma jesty can never be advised to consent, as deeming it inconsistent with the very existence of m onarchical institutuais. flits language to the House of Assembly was ex tremel y inconsiderate, if not deserving of a harsher appellation; the House of Assembly were justly indignant, and in their famous ninety-two reeolutions of the succeeding year they denounced the Noble Lord in set termse--(Hear, hear, hear.) They say,," That it is with astonishment and grief that they have seen in the extract from the dispatches of the Colonial Secretary, communi cated to this Ilouse by the Governor-in-Chief during thepresent session, that :one at least of the Members of his Majesty's Government in Eng. and entertains towards them feelings of prej: 'co and animosity, and inclines to favour plans of oppression an revenge ill adapted to change a system of abuses, the continu....;e of which would altogether discourage the people, extinguish in them the legi timate hope of happiness, which, as British subjects they entertained." It is not necessary for me to refer to the ni..ety-two resolutions on the Committee of 1834. The Noble Lord opposite was succeeded by the present Chancellor of the Exchequer, whose only official act was to take 31,0001. out of the army chest to defray the salaries of the unpaid officials of the province. Mr. Roebuck, I think stated, I know not upon what authority, or how trustworthy, probably it was upon the word of the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself, that a dispatch was written which would have settled all the difficulties in Lower Canada, but unfortunately the very day it was to have been sent off, the Melbourne Administration were dismissed, and no one knows what became of the die ' patch. The Right Hon. Gentleman was sueceeded by Lord Aberdeen, who, likewise, according to Borne of my Hon. Friends, wrote a most admirable despatch, which likewise produced no effect. Up to this period, the Tories, and the Tories alone, with the exception of Mr. Spring Rice, are responsible for the Colonial Government, and, as I think I have shown, there is no reason whatsoever to suppose that their conduct would be one iota better than that of the Whigs ; they in reality have been causes of those angry emotions and bitter feelings which have led to the present disasters. Since that period—since the beginning of 1834, her Majesty's present Ministers are alone responsible for Colonial mis. government. They sent out Commissioners to Lower Canada. The first object of the Commissioners was to deceive --they concealed their instructions, and pretended that they were unfettered upon every subject. Now the popular party had come to the conclusion that no ar rangement would be satisfactory without a complete ch‘v ge in the Con stitution of the Legislative Connell. The House of Assembly had ex pressed that opinion in their resolutions, and the Colonial Office had been repeatedly warned, that without agreeing to such a change, any attempt to settle the disputes would be useless : but in the instructions to the Commissioners, the question of an elective Council was a forbidden one ; this fact the Com missioners carefully concealed, and endeavoured by holding out false hopes to obtain the supplies. The following is the ac count of this, which must at least be termed an extraordinary p ro ceedine, given by Sir George Gipps :—" Had we, on our first arrival ( he said) declared that the question of an elective Council was absolutely a forbidden one, we should have failed, in limine, with one party, for we have now the best reason for knowing that there would in such case have been no session of the Assembly; had we, on the other hand, spoken of our instructions as more favourable to the democratic party than they were represented in the Governor's opening speech, we should not only have sinned against truth but have driven perhaps the English party to violence. (Hear, hear, hear.) I do not think we were ever at liberty to pub:ish our instructions in eztenso ; but had we even done so no good effect would, in my opinion, have been pro duced by it. The course which we pursued was so far successful, that there was every reasonable prospect up to the 9th of last month, that the arrears of the last three years and the supplies of the current year would have been granted We have the most complete assurances that on the 7th of last month such a determination was provisionally adopted at a private meeting of the persons of most influence in the Assembly, the question being then to come on in the House on the 1 1 th." Unfortunately, however, for this scheme, Sir F. Head, the Governor of the Upper Province, published extracts from his in structions, which were of a similar description to those of Lord Gosford. From those extracts the House of Assembly found they had been deceived, and justly indignant they set aside the question of paying the arrears, and voted a Supply Bill only for six months, which was rejected by the Legislative Council. With the exception of the resolutions of last year, and which were the proximate cause of rebel lion, I do not know any other charge which can justly be brought against her Majesty's Ministers besides that of having placed Lord Glenelg at the head of the Colonial Department. Every person reading the de. spatches laid upon the table of the House, or perusing the brilliant and sarcastic examination of those d 'currents made in another assembly, must I think acknowledge that the Noble Lord, though by no means the least competent of her Majesty's Ministers, is wholly incom. petent for his high and responsible situation.— (Hear, hear.) Such is the brief outline of the history of the Tory misgovernment of Lower Canada, and of the financial disputes which have agitated that province. The persons to be blamed, and the most criminal (for I will not arraign the miserable tools in the province, but call the chiefs to account), were the Tory Secretaries of State and for the Colonies—Lord Castlereagh, Lord Bathurst, Sir George Murray, Lord Ripon, and Lord Stanley. There are other grievances of the Canadians caused by these Hon. Gentlemen which require to be mentioned, and can be proved by the Report of the Commissioners, whose observations apply chiefly to the conduct of the three lest mentioned Secreteries—Sir George Murray, Lord Ripon, and Lord Stanley.—( Hear, hear.) The greatest grievance, next to the financial ones, and the most fre quent topic of complaint, was the constitution of the Legislative Coun cil. That body bad been framed on tee notion that it should represent in Canada the House of Lords of this country; but. instead of being an independent assembly, sometimes siding with the popular party against the encroachments of official authority, at other times uniting with the Government against the too rapid extension of popular principles, it sacrificed its independence by leaguing itself entirely with tee Government; it became the mere tool of the Government, to use the words of the Noble Lo:d in his days of juvenile Whiegery.—(Great laughter.) The conduct of this Colonial Government was equally impolitic ; instead of perceiving and aeknowledging the importance of the House of ASf embly as representatives of the people, it relied excel siv e.y for support upon the Legislative Council, The Commissioners in their general Report state, "instead of the Government shaping its policy so as to gain the confidence of the House of Assembly, it adopted the unfortunate course of resting for support exclusively on the Legislative Council. Thence arose feelings of jealousy arid animosity between the two Assemblies, and frequent and well-founded complaints of the Con atitution of the Legislative Council were made by the House of As sembly. In 1828 the Canada Committee recommended " that a snore independent character should be given to the Executive and Legislative Councils, that the majority of their Members should not consist of per sons holding offices at thepleasure of the Crown, and that any other mea sures that may tend to connect more intimately this branch of the Constitution with the interest of the Colonies would be attended with the greatest advantage. 'As long as the Tories r,mained in the Co lonial Oilice, up to the middle of the year 1834, what has been their conduct? 'The evidence of the Commissioners, which applies almost entirely to the conduct of Sir George Murray, Lord Ripon, and Lord Stanley is very valuable upon this subject, and I cannot re. frain from reading some of the extracts which were made by Mr. Roebuck. " They ascribe the fact •f no formal demand for an elective Council having been made before 1833, simply to the expec. Cation entertained by the popular party, that in consequence of the re commendations of the Committee of 1828, very _essential alterations in the composition of the Colonies were on the point'of being effected. An alteration was indeed produced in 1832. The Judges ceased to take any part in its proceedings, and thirteen new Members unconnected with the Government were added in the course of the year ; but that these new nominations were unsatisfactory to the Assembly, and that the 'disappointment they felt at the alterations of the Council was the cause ,of their fresh proceedings against it, may be inferred from the fact, that in the next Session of the Legislature was voted the first Address, in which a demand for an Elective Council was put forth." Tee Commissioners state that the popular party expected that the Legislative Council would be made to harmonize to a great ex tent with the House of Assembly. With regard to the appointments juQt mentioned they say—" We may, we think, venture to say, that whilst they satisfied the terms of the recommendation made by the Committee of 1828, as far as the matter of pecuniary independence of the Crown was concerned, they scarcely produced an alteration in the political character of the body to which the new members were aggre gated." The following is the delicate manner in which the Corn. missioners speak of the feelings and conduct of the Legislative Council : " In the course of these protracted disputes, too, it has happened that the Assembly, composed almost exclusively of French Canadians, have constantly figured as the assertors of popular rights, and as the advocates of liberal institutions, whilst the Councils in which the English interest prevails have, on the other hand, beets made to appear as tie supporters of arbitrary power, and of antiquated political doc trines ; and to this alone we are persuaded the fact is to be attributed that the majority of settlers from the United States have hitherto sided with the French rather than the lenglish party. The represen. tatives of Stansted or Misissquoi have not been sent to Parliament to defend the feudal system, to protect the French language, or to oppose a system of registration. They have been sent to lend their aid to the assertors of popular rights, and to oppose a government by which, in their opinion, settlers from the United States have been neglected or regarded with disfavour. Even during our residence in the Province we have seen the Council continue to act in the same spirit, and discard what we believe would have proved a most salutary mea sure, in a manner which can hardly be taken otherwise than to indi cate at least a coldness towards the establishment of customs, calcu lated to exercise the judgment and promote the general improvement of the people. We allude to a Bill for enabling parishes and townships to elect local officers, and assess themselves for local purposes, which mea sure, though not absolutely rejected, was suffered to fail in a way that showed no friendliness to the principle." And the following is the still more delicate manner in which the Commissioners of the Govern ment reply to the question, whether the Government, that is to say, whether Sir G. Murray, Lord Stanley, or Lord Ripon, had performed their duty of following the recommendations of the Committee of 1828. " If these recommendations are satisfied by the appointment of a large number of newCouncillors, none of t hem dependent on the Government for their income, but all living by their own means, and possessing property or engaged in pursuits connected with the gene: al interests of the coun. try, we have to report that the advice of the Committee has been fol. lowed. But if, on the other hand, their words be taken to mean that a change ought to have been made in the political cha racter of the body, we can only repeat what we observed in paragraph four of our preceding Report car the Council itself— that there does not appear to have been an alteration effected in that respect." I think, after this expression of the opinion of the Commis sioners, no one can doubt that such alterations have not been made in the constitution of the Legislative Council as m tight to have been made. I will not enter into any very minute detail a the evil effects of the Legislative Council. I will not enumerate t e number of important subjects upon which they have resister:, the House of Aesem. we, and upon which they have been reluctantly obliged to give way. They are stated in tine Fourth Rep.et of the Commissioners. I will, however, mention a few of them. The. Leeislative Council re. sisted the right of the Assembly to accuse aid bring to trial public aficers.—(Hear, hear.) 'Pile Legislative Corr cif refused to permit the House of Assembly to appoint an agent in England ; a matter which the House of Assembly considered of the utmost iemortance, on account of the frequent unjustifiable, and sometimes most unexpected, attempts of the Colonial Office to interfere with the internal concerns of the pro vieees—(Cries of " Hear, hear")—as, for instance, in the case of the attempted union of the two provinces in 1822—0 f the Canada Trade Act of the same year, by which as I have already observed, the House of Commons most unconstitutionally, and contrary to the Declaratory Act of 1778, rendered permanent certain temporary taxes imposed by t h e Legislature of Lower Canada for the purpose of assisting Great Britain in defending the province during the last Americans war—of the Canada Tenures Act in 1825, by which the whole civil law of England with all its incidents was at once introduced into the province. The agent's Bill has been regularly passed by the House of Assembly every, or nearly every, year for the last thirty years, and as re gu l ar l y re j ecte d b y the Legislative Council, though the Committee of 1828 strongly recom mended that permission should be granted to the House of Assembly to appoint an agent. The Legislative Council likewise long resisted the right of the House of Assembly to controul their own contingent ex omaes. The Legislative Council long opposed the demand of the Assembly ear the surrender of the proceeds of the Jesuists' estates ; and for the withdrawal of the judges from political affairs, or from their seats in the legislative bodies or the executive Council—indeed they have opposed eve ry measure which would tend to make the judges independent and liable to impeachment for misoonduot.—(Hear, hear.) Instead of the judges holding their offices as in thin country during goad behaviour they hold their appointments during the will of the Crown, and this fact, co upled with the fact, that on account of the expiration .of the jury laws, which the Legislative Council refused to renew, the Sheriffs who are mere tools of the government, can, by selecting the district out of whict the jury is to bechosen, peek the jury, has destroyed the confidence of the people in the due administration ofjustice.—(Cheers.) Moreover, Judspie sit upon thebench who are totally unfit for their office; for instance. Mr. Spring Rice while Secretary of State for the Colonies, acknowledged that Mr. Gale was an improper person to be a Judge ; yet Mr. Gale still remains in that high and responsible situation.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. Thempson likewise, who was proved to have been drunk on th e B e nch, and an habitual drunkard, nevertheless continues to be a Judge.—(Hear, hear.) To return however to the conduct of the Legislative Council, they re jected, in 1826, the School Bill, by which not less than forty thousand children were suddenly deprived of the means of education.—(Hear.) They " proved (to use the words of the Commissioners) at least at:oldness towards the establishment of customs calculated to exercise the judg ment, and promote the general improvement of the peoele," by their conduct towards the Parislt and Townships Officers' 8111. The evil which they did in rejecting this Bill may be understood from the following extract from the evidence of Mr, Neilson, given be- fore the Canada Committee of 1828 :—" In Canada," he said, " we have been plagued with an old French system of government ; that is to" say, a G.vernment in which the peopie have nu concern whatever, everything must. proceed from the city of Quebec and the city of Montreal, and persons must come to the city of Quebec and the city of Montreal to do every thing, instead of being able to do for themselves in their own localities. In the United States they have the English system, by which every locality has certain powers of regulating its own concerns, by which means they regulate them cheaper and much betters whereas, with us a man must make a journey to Quebec, he must go to a great ex pense, ha must.bow to this man and to that man, and rap at this door and rap at that door, and spend days and weeks to effect a little im provement in a road, or something of that kind of common conve nience to a district—whereas ail that is done in the United States, without going out of his own small district." The object of this Parish and Township Officers' Bill was to re medy this great evil, and consequently it was rejected by the Legislative Council, whose determined hostility to the wishes of the Representatives of the people are sufficiently proved by these facts which I have narrated. To these facts I could add a number of others— to these facts, however, I appeal when I affirm, that the Legislative Council, up to the latest moment, has been a real grievance to the Cana dians ; and the Canadians are justified in asserting either that there has been the most culpable negligence on the part of th• Colonial Secretaries in not improving the constitution of that body, or that its constitution it so radically bad that it ought to be abolished or ren _ . . dered elective. I would wish to show from the report of the Commission. ers, that the demand of the House of Assembly for an Elective Counci was not so extravagant a one as some Hon. Gentlemen seem to think. The Commissioners said, " We will even say that under more favourable circumstances, at an earlier time, or had less animosity been excited, we can conceive that good might have resulted from the principle of election." The chief objection of the Commissioners to an elective Council seems to have been that they feared that the other party—the anti-popular _ . party—would have broken out into ingurreetion. The Commissioners say, in the same Report, " The concession of an elective council in the present excited state of public opinion, would afford a triumph to one portion of the people, which, we say, would be fraught with danger." It has been argued by some persons that the contest between the Legis- lative Council and the House of Assembly has not been a contest be. tween a small party and the representatives of the people, but between those who are and would be the defenders, and between those who are and would be still more, the oppressors of the English race.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, 1 acknowledge that it is in accordance with the generous and noble feelings of a free people, to be most anxious, and to take care that wrong should be done to no one connected with themby ties of blood ; and I foe one shall be ready when it is proved that there is a risk of injury to the just rights of my fellow-countrymen in Canada to support any measure duly calculated to protect their interests, and advance their well-being, and so I am convinced will every Member in this House. —(Cheers.) At the same time, however, especial oare should be taken lest under the influence of our national feelings—lest moved by affections towards those connected with us—we should be induced to sanction the wicked desires, and gratify the odious passions, of cunning and unscru pulous men, whose only object is power, and whose purposes are more hateful even than those of the Orange faction.—(Cries of " Hear, _ . . Hear, hear.") Such, however would be the disastrous effect of being guided in our conduct towards Canada by persons who assert that the. House of Assembly does not represent the wishes of the. Ca. nadians both of French and English origin. A few simple facts which I will now state from the Report of the Commissioners, with regard to the representation, will prove the contrary. For some time previous to the year 1829, just complaints were made that the town ships were not represented, and that the whole system of representation was very unequal. When the Constitutional Act of 1791 was passed, the then Governor, Sir Aland Clerk, was entrusted with the power of dividing the Province into electoral districts : he took as the sole basis of his calculations the nu rerical amount of the population, and divided into counties as mach land as contained a certain number of inhabitants; consequently at that time a small district on the (comparatively speaking) thickly-peopled banks of the St. Lawrence was found to suffice, whilst inanore distant parts vast territories were compre hended in one county. After a certain interval, the representation, by the progress of emigration and the increase of population,became very un equal ; persons of the British race settled in the remoter counties were hardly represented at all in the House of Assembly, while the French population contained in the seigneuries of the small counties on the banks of the St. Lawrence had an undue preponderance, in the popular branch of the Legislature. Complaints were justly made by the town ships ; Bills were brought in and passed by the House of Assembly, but were rejected as unsatisfactory by the Legislative Council ; such was the origin of the complaint that the Biotish, or more properly speak_ ing the township population were unrepresented. I would here observe that for ordinary purposes the township population may be con sidered as of the British or Anglo-Saxon race—that is to say, either composed of emigrants from this country or of American settlers, who cannot be distinguished from one another, and who would unite together entirely, if the supposed (though highly impro bable) contest of races were to take place. The seigneurial population is almost entirely French. Now the complaint of the town ships of the undue preponderance of the " seigneuries" in the House of Assembly is no longer well-founded.—(Hear.) In the year 1821) a Bill was passed by the House of Assembly for amending the represen tation in proportion to the population ; this Bill, however, was greatly altered in the Legislative Council, and the alterations such, that, ac cording to all expectations, said the Commissioners, would have caused the Bill to be lost in the House of Assembly. "The ge neral effect," said the Commissioners, " of the alteration made by the Council is, as far as we can judge of it, to give six representatives to those counties in which a township (that is to say British) population prevails more than they would have had under the Bill as it left the Assembly, and five less to those which are inhabited by French Canadians.' And in ano ther portion of theirreport the Commissioners state that according to the census of 1831, " in the counties composed exclusively of seigneurial population, or containing a majority of that description of inhabitants, the proportion of people to each representative was in the former, 6,9.01 ; and in the latter, 6,883; and that in counties containing a majority of population settled in townships, or composed exclusively of such inhabitants, the proportion of people to each representative was 3,394, and 3,543. Thus the inhabitants of counties in which the town ship predominated, had nearly twice as many representatives in proportion to their numbers as the inhabitants of counties entirely seigneurial." Thus, by the amendments of the Legislative Council, the British popu lation have twice as many representatives in proportion to their num bers as the French population. The Bill thus amended was adopted by the House of Assembly without opposition. After these facts I can hardly conceive hose any impartial man can deny that the British por tion of the community have their fair share of the representation of the province. It is true that some of the persons who call themselves the English party were not satisfied, and made the following moderate proposal to the Commissioners, that there should be one representative to every 2,600 British, and one to every :24,000 French; that is that the British should have ten times as many representatives, in proportion to their numbers, as the French.—(Laughter.) This is not a bad sample of the moderate views of the so-called English party —the Commissioners very fairly observe, with regard to this proposal, that " they are forced to come to the conclusion, that it is one which they cannot recommend." It being evident, I think, that the House of Assembly fairly represents both races, what, I ask, has been the conduct of the British Representa tives ? Dees it bear out the position that the views of the British po pulation are opposed to those of the French ? I find that Ottawa, ales sisquoi, Shefford, Stanstead, Sherbroke, Drummond, and Megantie are in. habited almost entirely:by persons of British origin. These counties con taining a population of forty-one thousand in 183'1 returned twelve repre sentatives, one half of whom, representing a population of twenty-three thousand, are in variably to be found on the popular side. Many persons of British origin are returned by French constituencies ; but according to the Commissioners more than one-half of the representatives of British origin in the House of As sembly are in the constant habit of voting with the popular party ; and they have stated, likewise, in their general Report that " the majority of settlers from the United States have sided with the French rather than the English party," and Sir George Gipps allows that " so long as the contest can be made to appear as one not of nationality, but of political principle, the Americans and a portion even of the British will be on the democratic side." These facts, I think, prove that, up to the present moment, there is no real contest of races in the province Lower Canada.—(Hear, hear. ) In that province there is truly a so-called English party, whose only characteristic similarity to the majority of our fellow-country men, I believe, and I trust, consists in the fact of their speak ing the English tongue.—(Hear, hear, hear.) They are a small faction whose object is power, who, for that purpose ap peal to disgraceful national antipathies, and dare to make the extravagant demands to whioh I have referred, and claim as their right a tenfold share in the representation of the province—an odious and monopolizing clique, the source of all evil, the origin of all the disputes which have so long agitated that unfortunate country.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The organs of the Tory party have most correctly proved the simile. rity between this so-called English party in Lower Canada, and the Orange faction in Ireland.—(Hear, hear, and cheering.) Every odious sentiment, and every hateful principle —every mis chievous prejudice which is characteristic of the one belling likewise to the other faction—(Hear, hear, hear)—and I trust the people of this empire will show as little sympathy for the one, as it ought to feel for the other.—(Hear, hear, hear.) But if on the grounds of being dissimilar in race, and of speaking a different language, you are to accord dominion to this party in Canada, then tenfold is the claim of the analogous party in Ireland to supremacy over a people whose native language is tar more dissimilar to our tongue, and who spring from a stock far less akin to ours than that of the French.—(Cheers.) I own that I feel ashamed and humiliated that in this, the nineteenth century, I should have to combat and denounce antipathies arising out of the difference of race. Every effort has been made to excite such antipathies.—(Hear, hear, and cheering.) To one attempt of this description I would wish most particularly to allude. The Canadians have been represented as a bigoted and ignorant people, stupidly and slavishly attached to ancient and barbarous feudal customs' and privileges. Such was the language of the Noble Lord (the Member for Stroud) when quoting Montesquieu, he said, "He who pays eess is a serf—he who does not is free." Such has been the language of Hon. Gentlemen, because the Canadians prefer seigneurial tenure to that which has been attempted to be introduced by an Act of the Imperial Legislature. Now, I contend that they are justified in their preference of the eeigneural tenure and for the purpose of proving that they are in the right, I will appeal again to the Reports of the Canada Commissioners. The Commissioners state that "the feudal tenure as it was first in troduced Into Canada appeared to them to have been it same particu. Lars adapted to the settlement of a new country," and comparing the incidents of the two tenures, namely, of the feudal tenure and of that in free and common soccage, they say, " the modes of con veyance under the French customs are simple, expeditious, and cheap," and " the French rules of descent are much preferred to the law of primogeniture by the people of all origins on this continent," and they recommend tie application of the French modes of conveyance and descant to the tenure in free and common soccage. Undoubtedly there are inconveniences attached to the feudal tenure ; the heavy fines on the transfer of property, and the other obstacles to its free transmission, arising out of the feudal tenure, have an in. jurious tendency. But those evil effects are beginning to be generally acknowledged ; and," say the Commissioners, " in the views now expressed by leading Canadians of French origin there is no desire whatever to perpetuate the onerous parts of the tenure, and the people have been moved in some cases to represent the inconvenience." The patriotic meeting in the county of Vaudreuil demanded a relief from feudal burthens ; and the Commissioners state likewise " that a ittin 1834, in a rep or t w hi c h th e y made, ex. iim o ed aee of Assemblyfeelin feeling very favourable to the extinction on reasonable Committee terms of tne burthens of the seigneurial tenure." The French Cana dians, therefor:, are not blindly arid foolishly attached to the mischie vous effects of time feudal tenure; but they do object to the conduct of this country in attempting to interfere with a matter which ought to be one of internal arrangement—(Hear, hear)—and they object for this reason to some Acts of the Imperial Parliament, for instance to two, especially to the clauses of the Canada Trade Act (3d Geo. IV. esp. 111), sec. 31 and 32), and to the Canada Tenures Act, (6th Geo. IV. cap. b 1).) Now, with regard to the two laws which I have just mentioned, the Commissioners state that complaints have been made on the follow ing grounds :—First, " that the subject of tenures is one of internal ar rangement, in which the Imperial Parliament ought not to interfere, and on which it could not possess sufficient knowledge to legislate, without falling inta error." With regard to this complaint the Commis sioners say, " We think there is reason for it, and that the interference of the Imperial Parliament in matters of this nature ought, if possible, to be avoided. As an example of the inconvenience which it is liable to create, we may state, that, most probably from an insufficiency of local knowledge, it has been found lawful to commute, for the unconceded parts only of seigneuries, in two cases out of three that have occurred under the Tenures Act." The second objection is, " That tine Act of 1825, in a part of it purporting to be declaratory, established a law different from what had prevailed in practice, and unsettled various rights of property." The Commissioners say, " The second objection was also, in ou opinion, well founded. We con ceive that rho untumlitlNl introduction of Lhe FnFlitth law of rest nrn.. petty was at any tete not suited to the cirauesseancee or to the wishes us , any class of the people." The third objection is, that the. Act of 1825 as far (Co favourable to the seigneur, whilst it did very little for ithe censitaire—that is to say, that it was very advantageous to the great landlord, but not to the small tenant; this objection likewise say the Commissioners, "is we think founded in fact." Thus I con sider that I have shown, from the Report of the Commissioners, that the people of the province have had good reason to complain of the Tenures Act. I would observe that the Government is to blame for the small number cf voluntary commutations of tenures between seigneures and censitaires. The censitaire is only entitled to demand a commutation s of tenure when the seigneur has previously commuted with the Crown. Now the Committee of ISeS recommended that the Seigneurial rights of the Crown should he given up, and the droit de quint, which is a fine on the transfer of Seigneurial property, should be remitted in order to facilitate voluntary commutation between Seigneurs and Censitaires under the Act of 1825. This recommendation of the Committee of 1 89. has not been attended to by the Colonial Office, and for this inattention the Colonial Office is justly deserving of blame; for, say the Commis sioners, " if the impediment which is presented by the droit de quint were thus surmounted, nothing would be more easy than the arrange ment of voluntary agreements between seigneurs and censitaires for the discharge of lands from the dues and services of their actual tenure," . and for these reasons they recommended the droit de quint should be given - up. In short the Commissioners fully and completely allow the validity of the complaints of the House of Assembly, with regard to the Tenures Act : and in the conclusion of their report, they state, "we have no hesita tion in saying that in our opinion the Tenures Act of 1e25, and the clauses in the Trade Act of 1822, which relate to tenures, should be repealed." Thus, Sir, I have assigned my reasons for deciding that not the House of Assembly, but the Colonial Secretaries, most especially the three, Sir George Murray, Lord Ripon, and Lord Stanley, are to blame ; and thus, Sir, I have enumerated a series of grievous wrongs inflicted on the Canadian people by the tools of the Colonial Office, and for . which the Ministers who have presided over that department of the state ought to be held strictly responsible. But it should be remarked, that of all the high functionaries the Colonial Secretary is the one least exposed to effective responsibility, because the people of a mother country are necessarily uninterested and unac quainted with the affairs of their remote dependencies ; therefore it is only on extraordinary occasions that the public attention can be diverted from matters of nearer interest to colonial concerns: it is rarely that the Colonial-office can be made to feel the weight of public opi nion, and to fear censure and exposure; where, however, responsi bility is wanting, the experience of all ages has proved that abuses will exist and must continue to exist unredrsssed, until at last they reach that amount which induces them no longer to trust to prayer, and humble petition, but raise the cry of war, and have recourse to arms.—(Hear, hear.) Such has been the case of Canada. In that Province for the last thirty years, acknowledged abuses - have existed ; acknowledged by Committees and by Members of every party in the House of Commons.—(Hear, hear.) Great changes had taken place in the Government of this country, yet no change has taken place in the adrainiatration of Colonial affairs. • —(Hear hear.) - The same odious system of Colonial misgovernment which was pursued by the Tories, has been acted upon by the Whigs.__ (Hear, hear, hear.) The causes for the continuance of the same colonial system under Ministers of the most adverse principles are easily to be explained. The Colonial Secretary seldom remains long enough his office to become acquainted with the concerns of the numerous Colonies which he governs.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) • In the last ten years there have been no less than eight different Colo nial Secretaries.—(Hear, hear.) They have seldom, therefore, the time, " and still more seldom the inclination—(Hear) —to make themselves acquainted with the complicated details of their office—their necessary ignorance renders them merely tools in the hands of the permanent Under-Secretaries and other Clerks.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, it is in the dark recesses of the Colonial Office—in those • dens of peculatiun and plunder—it is there that the real and ir responsible rulers of the millions of inhabitants of our colonies to be found. Men they are utterly unknown to fame, but for whom, I trust, some time or other, a day of reckoning will come, when they will be dragged before the public and punished for their evil deeds : these are the men who, shielded by irresponsibility and hid.. .. den from the public gaze, continue the same system of misgovernment under every party which alternately governs the destinies of this empire:, By that misgovernment they drive our Colonies to desperation—( Hear) — they connive at every description of abuse, because they profit by abuse; they defend every species of corruption, because they gain by - corruption : these men I now denounce as the originators and perpetrators of those grievances in Canada, the evil effects of which this country has already begun to experiense. I trust the experience thus gained will convince the people of the necessity of a sweeping reform in the Colo. nial-ollice.—(Hear, hear.) There remains, Sir, for me - one other Canadian grievance to mention—the great, the master-grievance of all ; and for this grievance not only is the Colonial-office responsible, but the whole of her Majesty': Ministers, and even, unfortunately, the • imperial Legislature of this country; that grievance consists in the resolutions passed last Session by Parliament.—(Hear, hear.) Those resolutions virtually destroyed the Constitution of Lower Ca nada ; it was the grossest absurdity to call together last autumn the . House of Assembly, for the purpose of informing them that the Imperial Legislation had deprived them of their roost valuable ' - rights ; and I contend that the conduct of the House of As sembly was on that occasion most praiseworthy, and consistent with the spirit and determination which they have always evinced. It is for tunate that her Majesty's Ministers can find one individual fit to be islet • to Canada who taok no share in those wicked resolutions; for if Lord , Durham had either assented to, or approved of, or in any way directly or indirectly participated in the conduct of the Government on that occa. sion, not the slightest confidence, not the smallest reliance, could be placed in him, and his mission to Canasta would without doubt be • a complete, a miserable, and a disgraceful failure.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") These fatal resolutions were the proximate Ckllilt• of the present revolt ; and though I must deeply lament that blood has been shed, still if the insurrection should, by sending Lord Durham to Canada, tend to bring the unhappy affairs of that province to a satisfactory settlement, I for one shall not consider that on the whole there will be much reason for deep sorrow and regret, on account of late events. With regard to the issue of the struggle which is now taking place in our North American colonies, I have already expressed what are my hopes, my fears, and mywishes. For so doing I have been held up to public indiguatioyi, and received unmeasured abuse. But whether I am denounced as traitor Or rebel in the courteous though somewhat wearisome tones of the Noble Lord the Member for South Lancashire, or in the snore energetic vi tuperations of interested orators, is a matter to me of utter indifference. Not one expression which I used, not one opinion which I uttered, not one word which escaped from my lips with regard to this question do I in any way regret or retract—(Loud cries of Hear, hear, .hear)—and if Ido not at the present moment reiterate those sentiments, it is partly out of respect for the feelings of this As sembly, partly because I cannot find terms strong enough to embody my sentiments, and partly because I wish no longer to trespass upon your patience.— (Cheers.) Mr. S. O'BRIEN, although he did not wish to intrude long upon the intention of the House, was anxious to say a few words on the question under consideration. He had last year, although he was in a minority, opposed the resolutions proposed by the Noble Lord respecting Canada, ' because he anticipated the consequences which had resulted from them. After contemplating those results, he felt that he should never cease to rejoice at the course which he had been induced to pursue, because he felt that he should have participated in a woeful responsibility. In now, however, corning to a decision on the subject, he could take only one view of the case. He could only inquire what course was most calcu lated to avoid the shedding of blood, to restore tranquillity to Canada, and to bring back those relations which ought to subsist between a colo ny and the mother country. Under these circumstances he was bound to declare that in his opinion no measure could be better calculated to effect objects so desirable than the Bill proposed by the Noble Lord on the Treasury bench. People talked of the suspension of the Canadian Constitution. Why, the Constitution of 1791 was at the present mo ment virtually repealed. It was nonsense to talk of the House of Assembly being at present competent to any purpose of effectual legislation or Government. What he felt, therefore, that he had to choose between was, martial law, or the plan proposed by the Noble , Lord. He certainly approved of the plan to send an able Statesman to Canada for the purpose of endeavouring to reconcile the differences.. - which had unhappily occurred in that country. The character of the- - Noble Earl selected for that important mission, afibrded a perfect gua rantce that under any arrangement the rights of freemen and the Tiber. ties of the people would be respected. On these grounds he felt bound to vote for the measure before them. While he did so, however, he was desirous, if possible, to indicate to the Colonial-office on the one hand, and to the colony on the other, the course that was expected from them. It was expected that all which had passed should be con signed to oblivion, and that all the future should proceed on a principle 's of mutual forbearance and kindness. For his part he was persuaded, • that if the Canadians had not revolted, if they had confined themselves to constitutional representations of their grievances, they must have eventually succeeded in obtaining the objects at which they aimed. The Hon. Gentleman proceeded to enumerate the various points at issue. He confessed that the conduct of the Government towards Ca nada, had, in some instances, astonished him. The feelings of the ; majority of the people of the colony appeared to have been wholly neglected, and the wishes of a small minority only considered. — (Hear, hear, hear.) That was not the way to rule a country.- If the majority of the people could not be trusted, the Con stitution should at once be abrogated, and a different form of Govern ment established. The Hon. Gentleman then adverted to the proceed ing which had been taken by the Local Government in Lower Csmada in respect to the public meetings which took place in the province in con sequence of the Resolutions passed by the Imperial Parlianaent last year. He thought that these proceedings were characterised in too many instances by an undue severity. Instesd of upbraiding the Ca ludas for past conduct he thought that the best and most beneficial course that the Imperial Parliament could take would be to apply the whole of its wisdom and experience to the formation of a new Consti tution for those important and valuable provinces. The Hon. Member ' for Bridport (Mr. Warburton) had contended that the best policy of, Great Britain would he to dissociate itself ftom its colonies. From that doctrine he (Mr. S. O'Brien) entirely dissented. Colonies, if mis. governed, would no doubt become an expense to the parent State; s but well and wisely ruled, they were the sources of the greatest and. most valuable advantages. When, beneath the fostering care of la wise parental State, they had attained to sufficient strength to hoist an independent place among the nations of the world, they should undoubtedly be admitted to that freedom, which sooner or lute: they would be sure to attain). In no point of view, indeed, did, tare grandeur of England appear to be so great as when she was regard.ed, as the parent of independent nations. He thought that the wishes, of the . great majority of the Canadian people should be acceded to. If they demanded a responsible Executive Council, he would give them that also. He implored the House, now that a new reign was commenced, to apply itself seriously to the redress of all grievances of which the majority of the empire complained, whether in Canada or in Ireland. Mr. W. WILLIAMS regretted that he felt himself called upon to oppose that Bill, but he did so upon the ground that it contained an enactment which he thought would tend to aggravavate the already existing feeling of discontent amongst the people of Canada. He con sidered that the resolution to take the public money of the province, cola trary to the express wish of the House of Assembly, was a great vio lation of the rights of the Colonists, but he considered the Act suspend— ing the Constitution a still greater violation of their rights. He' would beg the House to bear in mind the statement made by Lord North' in 1775, when he brought his celebrated motion before the House. He' e then stated that disaffection not only existed in one of the thirteen pro-. vinces. But whet was the result ? No sooner was the intelligence re ceived in America than the whole of the colonies there broke out into. open rebellion, and in a very short time after the battle of Lexinga ton was fought. He (Mr. Williams), moreover, had heard no real pea- , son to justify the suspension of the Constitution. His opinion of sleets a proceeding was, that it would tend to produce so strong a feeling, sea deep a sense of the insult, that the people as a body would become Ms:effects d to the mother country. The only reasons which he hkd heard used wee'' that there were certain Local Acts which would expire in the course of this year, and only affecting a particular district in the country ; and that it was requisite that the Legislature should be summoned each year- Thesa reasons did not appear to him to have any weight, for all objection might be obviate:l by deferring till the last possible moment the pre ceeclings contemplated by the Bill. It was also very important to cone side: the statement in the Speech of the President, and the evident prepermions for war which it recommended. He (Mr. Williams) would, however, confess that he could not see that statement, and regard the ,present situation of Canada without apprehension. In the event of a ware if the United States were to obtain possession of Canada, hove ' would it be possible for this eountry to retain its other colonies in that part of the world—Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and the islands in the Gulph of St. Lawrence ? If the Noble Lord (Durham) went out as a pacificator, but carrying with him the suspension of the Constitution, all his efforts would be worse than useless. But he (Mr_ Williams) would like to know what loss this country would have sus tained if it hall granted an Elective Legislative Council 29 years ago Thinking, therefore, that this Bill would exasperate the feelings of the ■